Election 1: At odds of $5.50 to win, W&D will back Labor
W&D is not a smart fella. Surely the whole is the sum of the parts? Well, in the case of the federal election, that doesn't seem to be the case.
The bookies have the election odds as:
Which means that the Coalition is almost unbackable to win.
But the polls show a 'two-party preferred' vote of 50/50. Which suggests a hung parliament, noting that the polls assume that preferences (i.e. second or further choices if a voter's preferred candidate doesn't win enough votes) are distributed as they were at the last election - which may be misleading.
W&D knows that the winner of the election is the party that wins the most seats in the House election. The House has 150 seats, so a majority is 76 seats.
Work with W&D on this.
The current parliamentary position is:
Majority 15 (i.e. 91 - 76 = 15)
* Katter (Kennedy - Qld); McGowan (Indi - Vic); Bandt (Greens, Melbourne - Vic); Wilkie (Denison - Tas)
The bookies say...
...on a seat-by-seat basis, that the Coalition is trailing or equal in the following seats:
QLD: Petrie, Capricornia.
NSW: Eden-Monaro, Dobell, Page, Paterson, Macarthur, Barton.
WA: Cowan, Burt
So, the Coalition may lose 12 seats, the bookies say. That gives a majority of just three seats.
And in WA two other seats, Hasluck and Swan, are on a knife edge. Hmm.
So W&D cannot work out why the overall betting odds are so decidedly in favour of the Coalition, especially when the polls have the outcome at 50/50.
So a $5.50 bet on Labor, is, to W&D's mind a sensible bet. Clearly showing that the whole is not the sum of the parts.
But, of course, W&D doesn't bet.